Housing, sanitation, and voting: how durable goods shape electoral behavior

ABSTRACT

Introduction:  Policies that provide durable goods, such as housing and sanitation, affect millions of people, yet their electoral impact remains largely unexplored. This article investigates: (i) who receives these goods; (ii) how political favoritism shapes their distribution; (iii) the electoral consequences of such policies; and (iv) the factors that account for variation in these effects.

Materials and methods:  We conducted a scoping review of international academic literature published over the past 20 years. The search was systematically carried out using Google Scholar, and studies were collected via the Publish or Perish tool. After applying selection criteria, 19 articles were included in the analysis. The studies were categorized into four groups based on the type of goods examined (public or private) and recurring themes, including the targeting of swing versus core voters, strategies of political capture by local elites, and the electoral effects associated with the distribution of durable goods.

Results:  The distribution patterns of durable goods vary across political contexts. Swing voters generally receive more benefits, particularly when goods are high-value, while core voters tend to be prioritized for lower-value goods or near election periods. Political favoritism and capture by local elites also shape resource allocation, although territorial electoral competition can constrain these effects. The electoral impact of durable goods policies depends on the type of good, political timing, and voters' perceptions of the benefits received. Variations in electoral returns are influenced by factors such as the perceived value of the benefit, the electoral calendar, territorial distribution, and the government's capacity to respond to critical demands.

Discussion:  The studies reviewed indicate that there is no single logic guiding the distribution of material benefits or their electoral effects. These effects vary according to political context, the type of good, and voters' perceptions. Distinguishing between public goods (e.g., sanitation, electricity) and private goods (e.g., housing) is essential for understanding these variations. The literature shows that different types of policies generate distinct patterns of resource allocation and electoral returns. Analyzing these differences helps reveal the underlying causal mechanisms and refine explanatory models for understanding the political effects of material benefit distribution.

Keywords
housing; sanitation; distributive politics; electoral effects; scoping review